CLINICAL AND TRANSLATIONAL RESEARCH SUPPORT Kathleen Braden, M.D., Richard W. Serna, Ph.D., &Edward I. Ginns, M.D., Ph.D. Introduction to Revised Proposal This is a revision of a proposal that was submitted with our 2002 application (priority score: 190). That revision built on many areas of strength noted in its predecessor (submitted with the 2000 application), and was apparently judged a noteworthy improvement. Despite a generally positive review, however, aspects of the 2002 proposal were insufficiently clear and/or not adequately defended, leading to certain reviewer concerns and a less-than-"outstanding" rating. What follows will summarize strengths noted in our past reviews, the reviewer concerns, and the steps taken in this revised proposal to address those concerns. Strengths (2000/2002 proposals combined) 1. Centralized participant recruitment 2. Centralized management of IRB and consent procedures 3. Procedures for maintaining contact with participants and referral sources 4. Central database with desktop access for investigators 5. Specialized participant preparation (e.g., mock scanner) 6. Inclusion of behavioral specialist to assist with preliminary training 7. Ample resources for accomplishing the Core's aims 8. Provision of health screen for participants 9. An interdisciplinary research review team 10. Addition of applied behavior analysts